i have a Ukrainian friend who lived thru a german invasion and then the resulting russian invasion as they were pushed back she said the germans were looters and murderers ...which of course is part of normal war to kill all fighting age men and steal their gold... she said the russians were rapists she hated russians more...kind of makes you wonder how bad it could have been to hate them more than the ones who killed your father and brothers.....and friends i never asked her for details she is still alive..age mid nineties
I've read somewhere that Hitler was a month later than originally planned in launching the Invasion of the USSR. The weather played a big role - but I think the Red Army did too, along with the western Allies.
i'm sure there have been worse then both. and it isn't because of ideology. ideology is always just the excuse. it is the dominance of aggressiveness that is always tyranny. robbing freedom to 'defend' freedom. really for greed, hiding behind the apron strings of 'security' or even 'belief'.
It is a complex issue that must be analyzed in theoretical and practical aspects. For me, the Nazis were worse than the Communists. For the sake of principle: Hitler regarded inferior all non-German peoples. So no one who was not German could be treated equally by Nazi Germany. I am not referring to Jews and Gypsies: these, for the Nazis, should all be exterminated. Other people, as Russians, Czechs, etc, should be be enslaved. Alliances with Italy and Japan were merely circumstantial, though Hitler was a personal friend of Mussolini's. Communism, at least in theory, considered all human beings to be equal. Even so, it seems that the Communists killed more people than the Nazis. There is more: as a human person Hitler was better than Stalin. The German had friends and trusted them. The Soviet did not trust anyone. But it has to be taken into account that Nazism lasted only 12 years (1933-1945) and Communism survived more than 70 years and still continues in some countries, such as People's Republic of China, North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba. If Nazism, with this theory of racial superiority and extermination of peoples, had it lasted so long how many people would have been exterminated?
I think there's a dropping off point of evil where you can't really say one is better than the other. They may have different schemes for different times and places, but do they actually know any limits is the question. Do you think there's a point where all of the problems in a society cease and the dictator is like, "Welp, guess I killed enough people." I don't think so. They get done exterminating one group, another problem arises, and it's time to eradicate another group. If either had had their say there would be few people left but mindless drones.
I think there's a dropping off point of evil where you can't really say one is better than the other. They may have different schemes for different times and places, but do they actually know any limits is the question. Do you think there's a point where all of the problems in a society cease and the dictator is like, "Welp, guess I killed enough people." I don't think so. They get done exterminating one group, another problem arises, and it's time to eradicate another group. If either had had their say there would be few people left but mindless drones.
Well one was in the process of ethnic cleansing, ie trying to wipe multiple races out of existence. The other were authoritarian bastards who hated being opposed. One is technically worse than the other.
Really? Are we denying the Holocaust? About 5.7 to 7 million deaths by most counts--some 5.7 million if we only count Jewish victims and leave out the gays, gypsies and other 'defectives". Those "current Red Cross figures" have been disputed and denounced by the Red Cross as propaganda,based on incomlete records. ICRC Bulletin No. 25, Feb. 1, 1978; Patterns of Prejudice London, Routledge.12 (2): 11. January 1978. But you're correct about the Soviets, which might make them worse, at least quantitatively. As others have pointed out, the Bolshevik figures span the period of Lenin and Stalin--a much longer period. Given comparable time, who knows what the demicide toll would have been like under Hitler.
bolshivics did some things that weren't nice. nazis did lots of them deliberately. yes i think it makes a difference.
We know 60 million Whites were persecuted by the bolsheviks. We still question the 6 million number. That should be a conclusive response to this thread Ask a modern day bolshevik ; feel the bern.
Depends on what you mean by Jewish. Yagoda became a Christian before the Soviets took over, and after that, an atheist. And why is this relevant?
the nazis Bolsheviks started out ok. Stalin was the true dickwad. he turned on his own party and hunted members down. even communist china expressed their disgust towards soviet russia and relationships between the two broke down. the nazis were assholes and proud of it. genuinely believed complete fictitious out of their ass garbage about themselves, the "master race", and all that crud.
The original question is a bit like asking which is worse for you, arsenic or cyanide. Since the dawn of history, greedy people have been killing others to fulfill their obsessive needs. It is still happening today.
Bolsheviks of course. Stalin started the terror in Soviet Union even long before WW2 and killed at least 20 million people in his own country, so think about that! Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin
^ But they also freed Europe. Did the Nazis did something remotely similar? I guess it all depends who killed and/or raped our family members. Or its a numbers thing for certain people
i think the op wasn't going back far enough. there were plenty worse then both, and that isn't a matter of ideology either. i think the op is wanting to create a false equivalency to make excuses for fascism's harassment of innocent bystanders. there are many 'great civilizations', much praised by historians, as bad or worse though. so many things done by the oh so democratic roman 'republic', or even before the greeks. hamarabi's great invention was NO MORE THEN an eye for an eye, instead of all the screaming vengeance you could extract.
Jews are "white". They are not African, Asian, Latin. I know racists like to say Jews are a unique race it's not the case. Like all humans it's a few genes that create minor difference. The concept of what race is is open to interpretation. Their is junk hate science like you suggest and real science. Either number is bad and you focusing on the 60 shows what you really think of the 6. No one questions that Jews died, it happened.
Most jewish people who descent from Jews that lived in Europe for centuries are best described as white or caucasian. As it simply has become the predominant race (whatever we think or can think of race) they mixed with. For other jewish people this counts far less. Jewish people who's ancestors consistently lived and married in the middle east are often best described as semites. Merrian Webster definition: Semite noun Sem·ite | \ ˈse-ˌmīt , especially British ˈsē-ˌmīt\ Definition of Semite 1a: a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b: a descendant of these peoples 2: a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language